JOIN OUR MAILING LIST
  • Home
  • Portugal 2023
  • About
  • Gallery
    • This Was STC Santorini 2023
    • This Was STC Miami 2021
    • This Was STC Santorini 2018
    • This Was STC Miami 2016
    • This Was STC Santorini 2015
    • This Was STC Miami 2015 – Temple House
    • This Was STC Miami 2014
    • This Was STC L.A. 2013
    • This Was STC Bahamas 2013
    • This Was Miami – STC Oct 13-14, 2012 Seminar / Workshop
    • This Was STC Miami 2012
    • This Was STC Vegas 2011 – 2
    • This Was STC Vegas 2011 – 1
    • This Was Miami 2011
  • Model Search
  • Store
  • Blog
  • Contact

Blog

Amazon’s Studio Lighting Patent – What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Posted on: 06-24-2014 Posted in: Photography

 

After Shoot the Centerfold broke the story on the Amazon Studio Arrangement patent (Patent Number 8,676,045 or the “045 patent”) on May 2, 2014, the story went viral on the internet causing a worldwide commotion among both photographers and legal critics of the patent process.

HOW THIS STORY GOT STARTED – I stumbled across the ‘045 patent in the middle of the night because I woke up with an idea for a photography gizmo, and wanted to see if there was anything else like it that had been patented already. I went to the USPTO website and started a very broad search in the photography category, because I really didn’t know where else to start so I decided to “start at the top.” By chance the Amazon patent was near the top of the search results list because it had just been granted, and I downloaded it and read it. I was shocked when I read the patent. How could this be patented? Then I became suspicious. What are Amazon’s intentions with this patent? I even wrote a letter to Amazon asking about their intentions with this patent.

At its peak, the story became material for a Colbert Report segment where Colbert (who is well-known for his hostility toward Amazon) lampoons the patent in his own unique style of satirical news reporting. Many photographers have weighed in with their opinions, concerns and discontent about the patent from the popular “Strobist” blogger David Hobby, to an official statement from the Professional Photographers of America. On the other side of the fence sits blogger Rebecca Allen (a former Amazon employee, and non-photographer) who disapprovingly chortles that the “commentariat” didn’t bother read the patent. Allen attempts to disprove that any “prior art” exists that might have stymied the patent, and labels anyone engaged in the “rabid mockery of Amazon’s studio arrangement patent” as being part of a flock of bleating sheep. To which I say: Baah-Baah.

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? – I am an attorney and a photographer, and I actually read the patent (as many people did) and the “patent wrapper” (which many people didn’t read) which is the source of much of the detail in this article. It seemed obvious to me that what the USPTO examiner failed to do in researching the Amazon Studio Arrangement patent was to search any non-patent documents such as photographic trade publications, photographic lighting or studio lighting books, etc.

ibook-store-widgetTo the average person, it seems only logical that if the patent examiner had performed a search for prior art on the internet, it is likely that it would have revealed a wealth of non-patent publications showing this same or substantially similar studio lighting arrangement was already in widespread use around the globe. For example, a Google search of “white cyclorama studio lighting” yields over 20,000 results.

WHO’S BAD? – While this common-sense approach might seem like the way the patent examination process should go in theory, in reality, the process is nothing like that. It’s bad patent laws, and not bad patent examiners that allow patents like the ‘045 patent to get approved, according to Charles Duan, Director of the Patent Reform Project at Public Knowledge. Duan, an IP attorney, wrote an article published in Ars Technica entitled: “How Amazon got a patent on white-background photography – A drama in five acts: bad laws, not bad examiners, create obvious patents.” In his article, Duan draws on the public records contained in the “patent wrapper” and brings them to life in a “docu-drama” style story that reconstructs how the ‘045 patent was granted to Amazon.

A PATENT GRANTED ON 25 WORDS? – In Duan’s professional opinion, approval of the ‘045 patent hinges on twenty-five words found in Claim #3 of the patent:

“Claim 3. The studio arrangement of claim 2, wherein the first distance is about 4.5–5.5 times a height of the top surface of the elevated platform.”

As a photographer, I struggled to believe that these 25 words were the clincher for granting a patent to Amazon, when the “invention” was meant to “achieve a desired effect of a substantially seamless background.” I thought to myself, the distance ratio has little or nothing to do with achieving the desired effect! How could this be right? As an attorney, I struggled even harder to believe that these 25 words were what made this “non-obvious,” so I emailed Duan to express my frustration with his analysis, and he kindly responded to me. Duan responded to me by saying:

“In terms of your difficulty in understanding why Claim 3 clinched the patent: that’s exactly the difficulty I wanted you to experience, because it shows a real conflict between how the law works and how we imagine it should work.” 

THE REAL WORLD CONFLICT – In his article Duan points out the problems with prior art, the patent laws and the practical realities of what happens during an examination, by saying “No one would write an article with that exact distance ratio or file a patent application about it. No one would want to do so. It was too uninteresting a feature to have ever merited any attention. Who knew if Saigo [the prior art cited by the examiner] had used that distance ratio—Saigo’s application didn’t say. Who knew how many other photographers had actually used that distance ratio before—it didn’t matter, since it wasn’t on paper before [the examiner]. Who knew if some college dissertation mentioned the exact numbers—with only a few hours left, and with a stack of other applications to examine, this examiner would not find it.”

He goes on to say that “Photography against a white background is obvious, but photography against a white background at a certain distance is nonobvious? The examiner could perceive no reason why that 4.5–5.5 ratio was advantageous, and the text of the application revealed none. If this patent issued, it would not be because the invention was an improvement; it was because this Studio Arrangement claim was different. Not better, just different. But, the law said, that was enough to grant a patent. And [the examiner] would comply with the law.”

FEDERAL EMPOLYEE WORKING ON MEMORIAL DAY? – When I did some digging into the “patent wrapper” and other public records related to the Amazon Patent (presumably the same documents that Duan relied upon for his story) these are the facts that caught my attention, or seemed odd to me. For example, Rochelle-Ann J. Blackman the patent office examiner examined the patent during a federal holiday, on Memorial Day in 2013.

EXAMINER’S RESEARCH DONE IN TIME FOR LUNCH? – The amount of time spent researching this patent seems very brief to me. Examiner Blackman began by searching the USPTO’s database system for existing patents and prior art just before 8:00 AM, and by lunchtime (12:07 to be exact) she had found patent number US 20030206735 A1 (the Saigo patent) as relevant prior art, that could be used to reject Amazon’s patent application.

AMAZON PATENT REJECTED – Later the next week, on June 7, 2013 examiner Blackman sent an Office Action Summary – Non-Final Rejection to Amazon’s patent attorneys Thomas Horstemeyer, rejecting various of Amazon’s claims, citing Saigo’s studio arrangement patent. With only one piece of prior art being cited as an obstacle to Amazon having their application granted, attorney Reddy contacted examiner Blackman by telephone on August 29, 2013 to discuss the Saigo prior art, and to discuss with Blackman “proposed amendments, more specifically the way the previously indicated allowable subject matter would be incorporated in the amended claims.” Attorney Reddy filed Amazon’s legal arguments and remarks why Amazon’s claims 1-24 and 26-28 are allowable over Saigo, on October 7, 2013. In that same filing attorney Reddy reminds examiner Blackman that an “agreement was reached during the Telephonic Interview with the Examiner regarding amendments to the claims that would result in allowance of all pending claims.” At the same time, Reddy also submitted Amazon’s amended claims and stated in the arguments and remarks filing that the “Applicant respectfully requests that the rejections … be withdrawn in view of the amendment made herein.”

AND THE REST IS HISTORY – One Sunday evening late in October, Blackman did a search a search of prior art, and a search of the patent applicant/inventor names (Sawatzky, Porter, Strauss and Blank) and performed and “Interference” search using other search terms, such as: “background and white or cyclorama” etc. About a week later on October 28, 2013 the USPTO sent Amazon’s attorneys a Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due, and Amazon paid the fees for the patent on January 28, 2014. On February 26, 2014 the “Issue Notification” was sent to Amazon with an Issue Date of March 18, 2014 for patent number 8,676,045.

EPILOGUE – When this story originated, I sent a certified letter to Amazon’s General Counsel and to Jeff Bezos, expressing my opinions about this patent, inquiring about what their intentions were with regard to this patent, and requesting a response to my inquiries from Amazon Technologies. As of the date of this writing, I have not received any reply from Amazon, and I doubt that I ever will.

What will happen next? Will Amazon try and enforce this patent? If so how? What would happen if they sell it to someone else? Or is this just part of their ever-growing inventory of patents that they have obtained to serve some other purpose? Your guess is as good as mine.

By: Dana L. Manner

 

shop-stc-click-pointer-2-568

STC-LA-seminar-568-banner
© 2014 Copyright ShootTheCenterfold.com. All rights reserved.

  • Popular Posts
  • Related Posts
  • Write for us sponsored posts
    Write for us sponsored posts
  • Learning how to take the best photography
    Learning how to take the best photography
  • Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
    Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
  • How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection
    How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection
  • Write for us sponsored posts
    Write for us sponsored posts
  • Learning how to take the best photography
    Learning how to take the best photography
  • Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
    Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
  • How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection
    How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Twitter Feed

    Twitter not configured.

Archives

  • February 2025
  • August 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • April 2022
  • September 2021
  • June 2021
  • April 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • September 2010

Search Blog

Recent Posts

  • Write for us sponsored posts Write for us sponsored posts
    02-20-2025
  • Learning how to take the best photography Learning how to take the best photography
    02-20-2025
  • Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
    08-17-2023

Popular Posts

Every photographer has a story to tell …
© 2011-2023 Shoot The Centerfold. All Rights Reserved
  • Privacy Policy
  • Customer Support
  • Ordering Details FAQ
  • Payment Methods
  • Return Policy FAQ
  • License Agreement
TwitterStumbleUponRedditDiggdel.icio.usFacebookLinkedIn